So here's what is bugging me. WHY would assad have used gas attacks on civilians? This makes zero sense and seems completely illogical. Who were the
civilians exactly?

I haven't seen any statement from the assad government on the matter so I don't know why someone would do this. Is assad a stark raving madman? I
highly doubt it because I've spoken with a few Syrian refugees here about it and I get the same story every time. The media's story of what's going on
over there is utterly false and inaccurate. Everyone from there before this war were by and large living happy and peacefuly. There were certain
factions who were unhappy but you'll get that wherever you go in the world.

Were they rebels? And even then, why use gas? Why not just a missile? sarin gas is some absolutely horrible stuff and to be dumping it out into your
country willy nilly makes no sense, like dropping nukes on cities just because you can.

I'm not saying I know what's going on because I couldn't hope to know. This is political theatre period. At the end of the day, the west has been
caught doing false flags over and over again and this one has all the hallmarks of it, so I'm going to lean toward that as my theory.

This tomahawk strike was based on very flimsy evidence, if you're up to call it that, and it didn't really achieve anything more than nice pictures of
'beautiful warmachines' in action. Hence they were well aware that the Syrian Army isn't responsible for the attack, but in order to legitimize more
military spending you simply can't distance yourself from the "Assad has to go" narrative.
Thus they'll keep painting Assad as evil as possible, comparing him to Hitler and all that with Spicer spicing things up a notch, looking kinda tuff
and compassionate enough to stop babies from being brutally murdered, while brutally murdering babies with air strikes for freedom.

the same doesn't see Putin. There is no logic for Assad to use chemical weapons at the time he WINS conventional battles.

That doesn't mean he or his regime are the best for Syria. But an attack on Syria would bring a much worse development than the aftermath of Saddam
and Gaddafi. One may say, End times scenario...wasn't Damascus referred in one prophecy?

Thanks for the links!
It is clear the two biggest nuclear powers besides USA do not agree on the new reshape of the Middle East or other regions of the world. The West may
think it is in Syria's best interests. But it should account the fact that how many, most of the people on the planet live outside the Western
developed countries. May be they all want to share the Western opulence,a s the poor immigrants from Syria to Afghanistan who flooded Europe...But is
the West ready to provide them with that?

Let say another communist country fails, and I would not name it. What will the West do with the millions immigrants from there?

This tomahawk strike was based on very flimsy evidence, if you're up to call it that, and it didn't really achieve anything more than nice pictures of
'beautiful warmachines' in action. Hence they were well aware that the Syrian Army isn't responsible for the attack, but in order to legitimize more
military spending you simply can't distance yourself from the "Assad has to go" narrative.
Thus they'll keep painting Assad as evil as possible, comparing him to Hitler and all that with Spicer spicing things up a notch, looking kinda tuff
and compassionate enough to stop babies from being brutally murdered, while brutally murdering babies with air strikes for freedom.

So when do other countries get to launch missiles at the us for al the crap they've done to their own citizens?

Here is a short list of some of the atrocities carried out by the United States in its short 200 hundred plus years of existence. Most of the
information comes from the Wikipedia page "Unethical Human Experimentation in the United
States". en.wikipedia.org... These are chemical and biological experiments the U.S.
carried out on its own soldiers and citizens.

1. The first listing of a biological attack happened on the American continent before the United States was even a nation. "During the French and
Indian War, Jeffery Amherst, 1st Baron Amherst, Britain's commander in chief in North America authorized the use of smallpox to wipe out their Native
American enemy. In his writings to Colonel Henry Bouquet about the situation in western Pennsylvania,[12] Amherst suggested that the spread of
disease would be beneficial in achieving their aims. Colonel Bouquet confirmed his intentions to do so."

2. "In the 1880s, in Hawaii, a California physician working at a hospital for lepers injected six girls under the age of 12
with syphilis.[7]"

3. "In 1908, three Philadelphia researchers infected dozens of children with tuberculin at the St. Vincent's House orphanage in Philadelphia,
causing permanent blindness in some of the children and painful lesions and inflammation of the eyes in many of the others. In the study, they refer
to the children as "material used".

4. " In 1911, Dr. Hideyo Noguchi of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research injected 146 hospital patients (some of whom were
children) with syphilis."

5. "In 1950, in order to conduct a simulation of a biological warfare attack, the U.S. Navy sprayed large quantities of the bacteria Serratia
marcescens - considered harmless at this time - over the city of San Francisco during a project called Operation Sea-Spray. Numerous citizens
contracted pneumonia-like illnesses, and at least one person died as a result."

6. "In 1963, 22 elderly patients at the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital in Brooklyn, New York were injected with live cancer cells by Chester M.
Southam, who in 1952 had done the same to prisoners at the Ohio State Prison, in order to "discover the secret of how healthy bodies fight the
invasion of malignant cells". The administration of the hospital attempted to cover the study up, but the New York medical licensing board ultimately
placed Southam on probation for one year. Two years later, the American Cancer Society elected him as their Vice President."

7. "From 1963 to 1969 as part of Project Shipboard Hazard and Defense (SHAD), the U.S. Army performed tests which involved spraying several U.S.
ships with various biological and chemical warfare agents, while thousands of U.S. military personnel were aboard the ships. The personnel were not
notified of the tests, and were not given any protective clothing. Chemicals tested on the U.S. military personnel included the nerve
gases VX and Sarin, toxic chemicals such as zinc cadmium sulfide and sulfur dioxide, and a variety of biological agents."

8. "In 1966, the U.S. Army released Bacillus globigii into the tunnels of the New York City Subway system, as part of a field study called A
Study of the Vulnerability of Subway Passengers in New York City to Covert Attack with Biological Agents.[48][53][54][55][56] The Chicago subway
system was also subject to a similar experiment by the Army."

9. "Researchers in the United States have performed thousands of human radiation experiments to determine the effects of atomic
radiation and radioactive contamination on the human body, generally on people who were poor, sick, or powerless.[57] Most of these tests were
performed, funded, or supervised by the United States military, Atomic Energy Commission, or various other US federal government agencies."

" In a 1949 operation called the "Green Run," the AEC released iodine-131 and xenon-133 to the atmosphere near the Hanford site in Washington,
which contaminated a 500,000-acre (2,000 km2) area containing three small towns."

"In 1953, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) ran several studies at the University of Iowa on the health effects of radioactive iodine in
newborns and pregnant women. In one study, researchers gave pregnant women from 100 to 200 microcuries (3.7 to 7.4 MBq) of iodine-131, in order to
study the women's aborted embryos in an attempt to discover at what stage, and to what extent, radioactive iodine crosses
the placental barrier."

"Immediately after World War II, researchers at Vanderbilt University gave 829 pregnant mothers in Tennessee what they were told were "vitamin
drinks" that would improve the health of their babies. The mixtures contained radioactive iron and the researchers were determining how fast the
radioisotope crossed into the placenta. At least three children are known to have died from the experiments, from cancers and leukemia.[72][73] Four
of the women's babies died from cancers as a result of the experiments, and the women experienced rashes, bruises, anemia, hair/tooth loss, and
cancer."

10."From 1942 to 1944, the U.S. Chemical Warfare Service conducted experiments which exposed thousands of U.S. military personnel to mustard
gas, in order to test the effectiveness of gas masks and protective clothing."

11. "On November 19, 1953 Dr. Frank Olson was without his knowledge or consent given an '___' dosage before his death 9 days later. For 22 years
this was covered up until the Project MKUltra revelations."

The above listed stories are but a minute sampling of the experimentation carried on unknowing populace and military by its own government. It
cannot help but prove of the hypocrisy with which anyone in our government speaks. Some will say this is all from days past, but I could not dis-agree
more. Here are a few chemical and biological attacks carried on to this day in America.
- See more at: www.henrymakow.com...

The pantomime's of world governments are becoming predictable, they are all in it together, they create fear 😱 to control us, and let's be honest
we need controlling, well maybe not me, but you guys do..... Animals

The pipeline theories are hilarious considering for all the money the US or Russia have to waste in military actions and other expenses trying to
create the right conditions to build their dream pipeline they could've shipped oil via sea for decades. Makes no logical or financial sense, like
most hair-brained conspiracy theories.

Also, give this a read. Russia's story doesn't hold up. Besides, any
"independent" investigation is going to be blasted by whoever doesn't like the results as biased, no matter who does it. So whatever. Most people will
believer what they want, no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented, because it's all part of the conspiracy.

I find it odd that some of the people who rail against and distrust big government superpower leaders seem to implicitly trust Putin -- who himself is
a big government superpower leader.

That's like the fox telling the farmer that it will guard the henhouse to keep the wolves away. The fox might say "you need to watch out for mean
hungry wolves" -- and the farmer might fall for the fox's sales pitch because he agrees that wolves would eat the hens, but that doesn't mean the fox
has the farmer's best interest in mind.

It seems as if all Putin needs to do to have some people fawn all over him is to say "America is bad!" Some people eat that crap up.

edit on 12/4/2017 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

Where is the benefit in killing civilians with chemical weapons? Hoping the US will send more Tomahawks so they can spur their economy through
rebuilding projects?

Maybe I'm missing something here - I just don't see how they benefit from gassing civilians.

Assad attempted to test a new administration's resolve. Trump's foreign policy statements, twitter feed, had indicated he was not going to take an
active role in the Syrian civil war. If there was no action by the US to this sarin gas attack then Assad might have racketed up the use of these
weapons to help turn the tide and end the civil war.

Turns out Trump changed his mind.

originally posted by: olaru12
Trump warned Russia before he sent the missiles to the air base. And Russia warned Assad... That doesn't set of any alarm bells?

Trump warning the Russians and thereby Assad is really inconsequential. The strike was a message, it wasn't designed to remove his capabilities. The
one thing we wanted to avoid was Russian loss of life, things would be much worse in Syria today if we hadn't and Russians were found in the rubble.

1) Assad attempted to test a new administration's resolve when the war was all but won.
2) Assad need to test Trumps resolve, why?
3) Assad didn't use the gas on the rebels, no, he need to kill civilians..because, reasons.

People who support the Official Narrative(Airstrippers) define "proof" differently than the rest of us.

The officials warned not to fly on 911 doesn't count.
The drills on 911 that simulated planed flying into building doesn't count.
The Dick Cheney refusing to let NORAD intercept the planes doesn't count.
The impossibility of a fire making a building explode doesn't count.

originally posted by: face23785
The pipeline theories are hilarious considering for all the money the US or Russia have to waste in military actions and other expenses trying to
create the right conditions to build their dream pipeline they could've shipped oil via sea for decades. Makes no logical or financial sense, like
most hair-brained conspiracy theories.

Also, give this a read. Russia's story doesn't hold up. Besides, any
"independent" investigation is going to be blasted by whoever doesn't like the results as biased, no matter who does it. So whatever. Most people will
believer what they want, no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented, because it's all part of the conspiracy.

Translation: swallow the official load or your a conspiracy theorist! Anything the supports the OS is "evidence" and anything that doesn't is not
evidence.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.